About your Search

20120926
20121004
STATION
CSPAN 5
CSPAN2 2
CNN 1
CNNW 1
LANGUAGE
English 17
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)
fought our way out of these deficits and the last 12 years when we have gone from 4 trillion dollars in debt to 16 trillion dollars today? >> i am glad you mentioned that number. it is going to cause a huge problem. if you have cancer you do not wait until it is over your whole body. get all of these things, really explain the problem, and hopefully we will get people to deal intelligently with the problem. your wife he ran on fiscal responsibility in washington, declining trust in government, in addition to nafta. the truth is we are much worse on all of those issues today than we were in 1992. gooif you look back at 1992, in part because of the world ross , they did several things. impose budget controls and taxes when they thought they were responsible. they did the right thing for the country. president bush 43 -- his term is over. whoever the next president is needs to change course, because if we do not, the problems of europe could have here. >> we are going to talk about some of these issues of 9-11 and the war and the health -- in the tax cuts of 1998, but let me take you ba
with a clear, credible, concrete, and enforceable plan to deal with the structural deficit lying ahead. you need to do both. that is the only thing that makes any sense. it is the only thing that m akes sense from the standpoint of politics. >> you spoke in 1992 about the campaign, your plan sounded then a lot like some of these bowls simpson's balanced-type plants that are coming out now. you did some of everything. you did not leave out sacred cows. the one that higher taxes, higher gasoline taxes, you wanted the wealthy to pay more weather in higher taxes or not taking entitlements. do you find that willingness to day on the part of candidates to hit all the sacred cows? >> i do not see anybody doing it, do you? if somebody is doing it, i am missing it. i thought they would hope this go away and they could run on all these things when you are talking on the television. >> would it take candidate saying you'd need to do all those things, not just going after entitlements cut domestic spending, defense, but also to raise taxes? you need to do all those things, do you feel? >> we need to do
to saudi arabia to buy oil. that's what's added $4 trillion to our deficit. i mean, think about that. so we've created a mountain of debt for the next generation that they're going to have to pay off. >> sean: remember, under obama's watch household income has plummeted more than 8%, and he's added more debt than almost all of his predecessors combined. the president doesn't want to talk about his record because it's a record of failure. he's been disengaged from the moment he took office. not only is he not willing to meet with world leaders bike prime minister benjamin netanyahu, not willing to reach across the isle about serious matters. massive cuts and our defense are looming. the massive tax hike in history is imminent. mr. president, the solutions to those problems won't be reached by sitting on the couch of the "the view," nor found in jay-z's nightclub, nor in george clooney house. the author of a brand-new "new york times" bestseller is here. bob woodward. you said this is a moment of maximum peril. you described a president not engaged in terms of relationships to fix the problem
in the end a president piled up huge deficits that will cripple our children and grandchildren. look at the mess in the middle east where the president for ten days didn't tell the american people the truth about what happened in the death of an american ambassador. there's plenty of ammunition. but it has to be delivered in a firm systemically order way and people look up and go that's right. there's a simple test here. do you want four more years of obama? do you think this is the right direction? or do you think we need something new? i think a campaign which made that case clearly enough would carry ohio and florida by big margins. >> mitt romney was in westerville, ohio, today. i want to play a little clip of part of something he said and get your reaction to it. listen. >> okay. >> i want to bring the rates down. by the way, don't be expecting a huge cut in taxes because i'm also going to lower deductions and exemptions. >> so he's trying to combine if i take it right the tax and the deficit argument. do you think that's a little too complicated for voters? do you think that re
if it had not happen we would be talking about economy, deficits, jobs and affordable care act. if mitt romney is going to use this successfully he needs not only to make this critique and point out this is broader frame as seeing the president disengaged not up to the job, giving it his best and failing on behalf of the american people and relate that to the dough messtic economy as well. bill: when the debate number one is rather is week from today. carl, thank you. karl rove in washington on that. here is martha. martha: there are violent protests breaking out about big government spending cuts. look at these scenes. why thousands of people are taking to the streets in spain and what it could mean for your wallet here at home. we'll be right back. [shouting] [gunfire] [ woman ] ring. ring. progresso. your soups are so awesomely delicious my husband and i can't stop eating 'em! what's...that... on your head? can curlers! tomato basil, potato with bacon... we've got a lot of empty cans. [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup. we're not in london, are we? no. why? appar
deficits? >> no! >> yeah, i don't believe we can afford four more years like the last four years. the people of ohio are going to say loud and clear on november 6th we can't afford four more years, we must do better. [cheers and applause] megyn: well, one of the political writers focused on the romney change today is chris stirewalt, fox news digital politics editor. chris, there is a shift in the romney approach. describe exactly what we're seeing. >> well, what you're seeing is a campaign that had previously been trying to have a campaign that was structured around the idea that barack obama was a nice guy, a good fellow, a good dad and an all-around swell american but that mitt romney thought that he could probably do a better job being president and manager of the economy than he could because they were very worried about not only fending voters had voted for obama in 2008. they didn't want to sound like romney was being a jerk, but they were worried, too, pretty obviously, about what the establishment press was going to say. if romney came out and attacked the first black pr
is liberal to cut spending? i think is liberal to cut taxes when you are operating a deficit, because you are spending money. >> i do not think your labels mean a lot. what i have said from the beginning -- the centerpiece of our problems is the national debt. we simply have to look at this. whether we do it this year because of the way our economy is or next year, a two-door 0.3 trillion -- 2.3 doris trillion -- >> i want you to respond to this. >> i'm glad there is a clear contrast between the two of us. i do not believe we should raise taxes. i do not think the problem is that americans are not taxed enough. mr. sadler has been very candid that he would consider raising taxes on every single tax and who pays income tax is. >> that is not fair. >> if you would consider allowing all of the bush tax cuts to expire, that would raise taxes on every single tax and who pays income tax. are the texans to pay income taxes we would not raise taxes on? you did not have an answer. >> you will not put words in my mouth. i would say, the first place, we have to balance the budget, cut spending, and
reducing the deficit making huge profits returning record amounts of money to the treasury as a result of all of their previous quantitative easing. so, the opposite of spending your tax dollars is true it of course the fed is legally independent and run by a diet that is appointed by george w. bush. so this is so completely over the top that we decided we've got to do a piece on that particular e-mail. but pretty much of the messages to the true believers have got to exceed what we in the bunker before we pay much attention to them. as the nec we are out of time. thank you for your attention and appreciate your questions. [applause] speed in the transition we are going to ask the second panel to come up and area video we have produced to help stations engage in ad watching in the local broadcasts. we know that when the ad is added full stream you increase the likelihood that the ad is believed and you don't hear the reporter. swedes distributed with the annenberg foundation. if we could play that please, gary. >> what's the difference between seeing this, traffic lights in china and t
to the american society of civil engineers we are now $2 trillion in deficit in terms of infrastructure. immigration we have a policy to get a great education and then get the hell out of our country. we are fighting on the simplest h-1b issues that are so vital for our future strength. fourth, the rules for incentivizing risk-taking and preventing recklessness. i don't think that we have in any way remedied that the way we want and on the government funded research if it looks like an ekg heading for a heart attack. i don't know if they are relative to what. all i know is in the things that have historically made us great, on each one of those i see us not going in the direction we should be going. and for me that is the alarm bell and we could call and peptalk but i have been trying to put forth. >> jessica, let me ask the same question of you. are we as strong as we've ever been or are there other ways you see measurable decline? >> to me it's obvious that we are not as strong as we've ever been but for the reasons that tom has just enumerated, but also because the world has changed
." two things about that. the fed is reducing the deficit. they are making huge profits, returning record amounts of money to the treasury. , the opposite of spending your tax dollars is true. the fed is legally independent and run by a guy who is appointed by george w. bush. it is so completely over the top that we decided we had to do a piece on that particular e- mailed. pretty much these messages to true believers have to exceed what we have already debunked before we pay attention to it. >> we are out of time. thank you for your attention. we appreciate your questions. [applause] >> please take your seats. 30 seconds. this fact checking futile or fruitful? a doctoral student. see will ask the question, can misinformation affect attitudes even when questions -- corrections work. how can journalists increase the likelihood that fax will win out? the third presenter, staff member, asks, does stand-alone the fact checking work or doesn't backfire as a result of a controlled experiment? then, we will be showed an journalism that fact checks. we will reserve 20 minutes for questioning at t
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)